Yes, sir. Well understood. On top of that, the announcement was mistaken. System's version is at 0.1.8, not 0.0.8.
Will do better next time. On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 3:49:05 AM UTC+3, Michael Klishin wrote: > > On 26 May 2015 at 03:45:04, Daniel Szmulewicz (daniel.s...@gmail.com > <javascript:>) wrote: > > Is there a consensus as to what versioning scheme works best? > > Or is there no such beast? > > Peter Taoussanis has expressed some reservations regarding > > SemVer and is proposing a variation on it, which he calls BreakVer. > > Use BreakVer if you want. Just don’t keep endlessly bumping the patch > version while what you introduce is massive breaking changes or new > features. > And don’t do what ClojureScript does (0.0.0 with a nonsensical numbers at > the end). > > SemVer has been working well for ClojureWerkz and dozens of other projects > I asked > about it. But there are slight variations on it, and that’s perfectly fine > as long as the basic idea is the same. > > 0.0.8 that “changes everything, again” is nowhere close. > -- > @michaelklishin, github.com/michaelklishin > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
